Re: [GZG] Mixed Role Fighters

On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 8:44 AM,  <emu2020@comcast.net> wrote:
> A good example of how something can be multi-role. One could make the
same
> arguement for the German 88 in WW2. I would say, however, that there
is a
> big difference between the demands placed on an artillery piece and
that of
> something as complex as a fighter.
>
>
The german 8.8 cm anti-aircraft gun is a poor example of a jack of all
trades claimant.  The ballistic requirements of engaging high flying
aircraft and engaging heavy armor are pretty much identical-- heavy
projectile fired at a high velocity.  If the gun used the same
projectile for both roles, it would be a winner.  For a field gun, it
was a pain to limber and unlimber, so it had better be at the right
place when the shooting stops.

Only two things kept the equally magnificent british 3.7 inch
antiaircraft gun from achieving the same fame-- poor crew arrangement
that had the aimer facing the wrong way for field use (not an issue
for AA barrage fire) and the lack of an armor piercing shell.

The reason that the germans used the Flak38 (?) as an antitank gun, at
all, was that they did include some AP shells in the basic unit of
fire and there was nothing else in the area when some allied tanks
showed up.

The MG34 and MG42 have better claims.  Feed them with a snail drum and
they are good light machine guns.  Mount them on a tripod and load
them with belts and they put in good service as a medium machine gun.
Add the telescopic sight and have adequite extra barrels, and it will
shoot all day as a heavy machine gun.

An example of the jack-of-all-trades, master of none is the F4 Phantom
II.  It can fly as an anti-air missile platform, and carry a ground
attack load at the same time.  Going for long range requires the
sacrifice of attack ordnance.  However, if it must dogfight on the
way, the bombload must be jettisoned, possibly the extra fuel, as
well.  The F15C Eagle ups the anty by being a good dogfighter
(something the F4 was not really designed for), and it can even
dogfight in its long range configuration, but even it must jettison
the ground attack ordnance.

The important thing is that an aircraft that can dogfight as well as
an F15C, but does not carry long range BVR missiles, or a large
ordnance load, costs much less than an F15C-- just look at the F20
Tigershark.  The F18 Hornet replaced the F8's and A7's on USN
carriers, did either job at least as well, if not better, but cost
more than both combined.

It should be noted that a fighter that can act as either one of two
different roles that costs more than the sum of its roles is still a
bargain, as it only fills one hanger bay.

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l